Looks to me the aircraft went light on the first touch which meant the normal corrective action was overly exaggerated, thus requiring the numerous corrective actions to straighten the alignment.Testament to the undercarriage strength, the tyres must have taken a massive amount of lateral force.

Holy Guacamole! Good for Captain Ahab! But I agree his rudder technique may not have been optimum. As a DER who has done repairs on Airbus landing gear, I would hope for a THOROUGH inspection of not only the gear, but the entire airframe. Am I the only one that noticed the Mambo the horiz was doing at the end of the rollout?

Why? They would have made a decision that the wind was within the "demonstrated crosswind component" prior to landing. Also the worst time to go around is right after you touch down in a low-energy condition.

And what would be the point? They come around and repeat the previous performance? They have to get it right the first time - at the rate they are being paid....

They obviously didm't make the correct decision..look at the whole video prior to this part of the clip....and they dont always get it right the first time, that's why there are go arounds..I agree that the go around, if initiated, should be done long before wheels down.

No I meant wheels down...gear down before landing, wheels up is taking off, wheels down is landing, touchdown is a straight shot at a target or a footnbll play...ie when Falcon 9 First stage lands on target at Cape/Vandenberg or on "Just Read The Instructions" or "Of Course Still Love You", that's a touchdown.

NBC news showed the approach at a very fast speed and the plane was like a fish flopping around out of water. Don,t know if was an error, act of stupidity, or just another shot at making the news sensational.

If you watch Cargospotter's video on Youtube, I believe that is what NBC showed..it was coming in hot to compensate for wind..flopping like a fish?..she was bouncing around a lot and watch the outboard area of the right wing..I would have done a go around and tried again or done an avert to Cologne/Bonn..sometimes wind gusts just aren't worth the risk.

The second part of the Cargospotter shown here on Flight Aware is the same video with the approach being shown on NBC. The approach was shown many times faster than reality. They did show the landing at normal speed. It would have been terrifying if they actually had gone through that.

The first and second part of Cargo's video didnt speed up approach and I now see what you meant about the fish..I did go through the third part and I believe that was an error/bad editing judgement right towards the end with the rapid landing...watching how they were bouncing around that bad, as I stated, should have done a go around....If this was a second attempt, don't gamble on pax lives and do a weather advert..obviously the winds didn't decrease in intensity.

What we see here is a lack of basic flying skills, regardless of the size of the plane, combined with a demonstration of just how effective the air rudder is - even at low speeds. Regrettably this is common among pilots who drive these planes with a high level of automation.

Secondly, the whole landing looks unstable without a clear concept of how the wind is affecting the aircraft on short final. When you reach this point, all you have to do is straighten it out SMOOTHLY with the rudder. There is a risk with the big jets that you can catch a wingtip or an engine cowl in a wing-down landing; that's why they land level and kick straight.

I spoke with a friend who has extensive experience flying comparably sized aircraft. He echoed your statement. This was a complete muck up on the part of the pilot flying. The two items he mentioned were the failure to decrab and a poor flare. Then they made it worse by over steering as evidenced in the wild rudder swings. My friend further proclaimed gear problems are in this plane’s future.

You are spot on with your observation (I am not a pilot but I have seen many A380 pre-certification crabbed landing videos). The conditions may not be comparable with the previous videos but I wish that further details will trickle down so that we can simulate these conditions to train the future pilots at Emirates.

How much of a delay is there between when the pilot makes a rudder command and the plane acts on it? Moving a runner that size takes some time, but how much? How much computer control is typically used during a landing like this?

That’s a yah but. Company’s really aren’t big on spending thousands and thousands to fix those little “oopes” nor do they like all the negative PR when millions see it on TV. No matter how you look at it there were big judgement and or piloting errors. I’m pretty sure the crew got a “warm” welcome on return to headquarters.

Agreed, but my comment was pertaining to the criticism of the flight crew's handling of the event. Personally, I can't help but believe they were thanked effusively by all the departing pax. The corporate side of the event is an entirely different issue...IMHO.

I don't know if it would be true the pax would thank the crew, if they did it would because they didn't know how bad they screwed up and how close they were to an accident. They are after all trusting the crew's experience, judgement and skill and are not expert commentators.

Except for a love of flight, I'll raise my hand as the least knowledgeable of anyone on this board, from a technical perspective, but I have to imagine that it's the enormous surface area of this monster that gives the wind so very much to work with, that causes this drama. Have to imagine that a smaller machine, with the wind grabbing on to less, has an easier go of it. I mean, what are we talking about there, five stories of surface area? And, yes, as said elsewhere, kudos to the crew for the skillful wrestle.

That kick from crabbed to nose-straight, wingtip down into wind has always been a challenge for me. Although when you get it perfect and grease it in on the upwind main gear, then gently transition back to wings level, nose gear on the centerline, there's no better feeling!

I am still pondering the role, (if any), that the "fly by wire" control logic may have played in this landing?

Watching the rudder surfaces deflection during approach, only the bottom half was making full deflections. If you watch the upper half right at the moment of first wheel contact with the runway, and at the moment the right landing gear compresses, the upper half makes its first full deflection, significantly increasing yaw.

The question in my mind is was this purely the result of increased pilot input or did the control logic law make an adjustment in control surface output based on its sensing runway contact?

I don't know the exact number of sensors that make up the control logic response algorithm, speed, angle of attack, thrust, landing gear squat switches(?), but I do know as configuration changes are sensed, control deflection limits change. This control law algorithm acts as a filter to the pilot commanded control inputs and might add or subtract actual surface deflections given a specific stick and rudder pedal deflection but measured against differing configurations.

Did the control law encounter an edge condition that instead of protecting against, ended up amplifying?

Would've been a bit frightening for the passengers, extremely poor technique of the pilot caused that. Unfortunately the way new pilots are trained and their over reliance on technology we will see more problems and more accidents in the future.

As a pilot of smaller planes, typical crosswind approaches is crabbing on short final. Then slip to touch down the runway. The slip will normally have one of the main wheels touch the runway first to counteract the crabbing inertia. By crabbing, is the noise of airplane pointing towards the wind, but over the runway, don't want to touchdown sideways.

Now sure, but I think the B-52 was designed to land at a crabbing posture...

Anyway, looks like an over correction when the pilot "tried" to slip the touchdown, was painful to watch. But, look at crosswind landings on youtube, I see many airliners touchdown while crabbing!

The A380 has a computer between pilot and all control surfaces. It appeared to me that the rudder went from single panel deflection to dual panel deflection coinciding with wheel touchdown which greatly increased deflection force. While i have no insight into the changes in control logic this might cause, I would be interested in hearing from someone who does. i.e did the control rules change on the pilots at an inopportune moment or did the pilot directly command that change though a change in control force input?

Could someone explain what error the pilot made? I found the three cross wind landing types. To this n00b it appears to be a crab landing with a possible de-crab intention. Please correct me if I'm wrong. The rudder is used to align the plane with the runway but even after watching several youtube clips I'm unable to spot the error. Genuine question, engineer level but I'm not a pilot.

First was lack of an adequate flare, likely also poor airspeed control. Touchdown is typically meant to be at Vref for the selected flaps plus 5 or plus the gust factor of that is more up to either 15 or 20 depending on aircraft. The resulting hard landing in a crab in this case is difficult to control as the aircraft adjusts its body to the actual direction of travel. Notice the gross over controlling on roll out. Judging by the overall poor technique I assume after touchdown the upwind wing was not commanded progressively down which aids in directional stability. See my post above regarding other DUS landings on utube.

In a "heavy" transport category airplane their is no real adequate "flare" on a gusty Xwind day, especially if "some" of those gusts exceed the max. demonstrated capability of the "pilot", let alone the demonstrated Xwind capability of The airplane. Bet he still has a job. A prolonged flare puts you in the weeds or just as crooked 2000 feet down the runway. In his scenario, you arrest the descent to as little as possible as late as possible and wrestle the controls so as not to crunch an outboard engine and accept the Crunch. The timing is the "thing" At some point the rudder might have been providing some thrust,IDK. But I bet he has more logbooks than you and it didn't wind up like some of those FedEx DC10/MD11's did in similar conditions. On their backs, burning. Must be a tough aircraft to land in a Xwind. Can you do it?

Having said that the pilot had two choices and split the difference and that made the situation worse. The choices were 1) land the aircraft in the crab. Since the center of gravity is forward of the landing gear the forward momentum would have straightened the aircraft out with no control inputs from the pilot. There would have been some nose movements back and forth but far less than what was experienced (if one watches the vast number of crosswind landings in large aircraft this is what is generally done) -or- 2) transition to a slight slip. The pilot straighten the nose but did not simultaneously lower the right wing. Lowering it 5-10 degrees and allowing touchdown on the right gear followed by the left gear would have made the transition smoother.

A perfectly executed crab approach / transition to a slip upon flare crosswind landing is a thing of beauty. Tried to locate a video but this was the best I could find.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7NACXVZXeYU

And for those "experienced" pilots who are generally trained to land in the crab in crosswind conditions and say this just can't be done with a large aircraft I beg you to go back and get some training.....

The manufacturer videos show certification requirements, so it's what can be done in a worse case scenario not necessarily what should be done. The crab into flare and correct to centerline then touchdown technique is indeed a thing of beauty but requires the flare and good control ... which you may notice didn't really happen on this landing. Some might call that a "link in the chain"... I did see a set of videos on utube taken at DUS with a number of landings in similar conditions some of which demonstrated the technique I mention above quite nicely.

You forgot the third choice...execute a go around and try again...and that goes for any craft large or small.If he had tried a transitional slip, chances are the sheer weight and force would have crippled the right gear and flopped it on the deck.

I agree a go around is always a good option - while one is in the air. Once on the ground and the wobbling starts the best choice is to ride it out. Sorry, but you are very wrong about the gear. It can stand extreme vertical forces without damage for exactly this reason. The gear is design to detach with extreme shear forces (Asiana 214) but vertically one would be shocked at the strength. I challenge anyone to show me one accident photo where the gear has popped through the wing....

Im not saying popping through a wing, Im sayimg either a slight bending or twisting or even tire blowout. Remember the gear has to withstand horizontal as well as vertical stress and is comprised of more than just the strut assemblies (I dont know what the strength rating is on a wing and 1 inboard strut) but also the tires, hydraulics and braking units. Plus with a 5-10 degree wing arch, that is placing that inboard engine very close to the ground.

"....and the LEFT main gear was pushed up through the wing." BA77 crash @ LHR.1/17/08https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Airways_Flight_38andhttps://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20080117-0

I am unable to produce a photo unfortunately but I have personal knowledge of a Lear 25 that managed to poke the left main through the top of the wing in a "hard landing" incident several decades ago. N98RS, s.n. 148. Wing was replaced, along with some incidentals, (like the gear) and she flew until I guess the last entry here, https://flightaware.com/live/flight/N98RS , in 2015. At least 30 or so entries in one of my logbooks. I know, CFR Part 23 cert. originally, but Part 25 later and transport category, turbojet. And not the most forgiving flying machine ever to be certified. Otherwise, in complete agreement on a go around being a good option. Unfortunately, very gusty X-wind conditions mean that option may be off the table if the biggest gust comes in the flare. Especially in an 850,000 lb. left seat. Might be a good thing there wasn't always a camera around to record all of our "arrivals".

I think this video is slightly exaggerated by the zoom on the camera, but still a pretty crazy crosswinds landing!!! I wonder if this is an example of from a C172 in flight school straight to an A380 special???!!!

Sure there is a foreshortening effect. On the other hand, you can easily see how much the plane translates from side to side. Also look how much the rudder is working. That's not from a foreshortening effect.

Yes. There is a difference between airplane pilots and airplane drivers. I wrote a 58 page pamphlet/book addressing the subject in hopes of bringing drivers over to the pilots community. If I can figure out how to disseminate it it might make a difference in safety. rawhp@aol.com

If not, the contents of their colon most certainly did. The phone call from cabin crew to the gate boss went something like this: "Send MX with a wet vac to rows 31-37, seats A-G. Why? Apparently some clown shite themselves when Capt. Ahab landed Moby Dick in a 60kt crosser"

Not when the aircraft is in flare law like this case, and not on the rudder anyways. This could have happened the same way in any other aircraft. In my opinion this is an example of pilots not getting enough handflying practice.